PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT: A CORNERSTONE OF
PHILIPPINE IRRIGATION PROGRAM *By
Bayani P. Ofrecio **SUMMARY
The National Irrigation Administration (NIA) is the government agency in thePhilippines mandated to develop water resources for irrigation purposes. It is classified as agovernment-owned and controlled corporation. A major strategy implemented by NIA is theapplication of the so-called “participatory approach program” (PAP) concept in theirrigation environment. The approach enables all stakeholders to be involved in practically allphases of the irrigation endeavor. The concept was introduced in the early ‘70s and with its
positive results, it was institutionalized in all projects implemented by NIA. Before theintroduction of PAP, the agency was doing all the planning, designing, construction andoperation functions with almost no participation from the project-beneficiaries – the farmers.
Central to PAP is the organization of irrigation-beneficiaries into formal groups called
Irrigators Associations (IA).

Through a professional NIA staff called Institutional

Development Officer (IDO) deployed in the irrigation area, the IAs are trained on various
aspects of basic leadership, financial management and irrigation system management to equipthem with the capability to manage their associations. Eventually, the IAs are granted legal
recognition by the government allowing it to enter into contracting arrangement in the
management of the operation and maintenance (O&M) of the irrigation systems. The formalorganization and legal recognition of

IAs have empowered the irrigation beneficiaries to*- Country paper presented at the 2005 Tsukuba Asian Seminar on Agricultural Education held on November 814. 2005, Agricultural and Forestry Research Center, University of Tsukuba, Ibaraki Prefecture, Japan** - Irrigators Development Chief, National Irrigation Administration, EDSA, Diliman, Quezon City,
Philippines, Telephone No. (632)927-78-02, Fax No. (632)925-32-10, (632)925-32-06, E-mail Address:
bay_ofrecio@yahoo.com

1become self-reliant and independent organizations. The contracting agreements, collectively
called O&M contracting, is either canal maintenance, irrigation service fee (ISF) collection
and complete management take over of small irrigation systems. In the canal maintenanceagreement (called Type 1) an IA receives about P2,400 (US$44) per month while under ISF
collection agreement (called Type 2), the IA gets a commission ranging from 2 to 15% of thecollected amount. Under complete management takeover (Type 3), the IA assumes complete
management of the system and pays, through annual amortization, the construction or
rehabilitation cost.
An expanded version of the O& M management turnover program called Irrigation
Management (IMT) was later introduced. IMT affords the IA and NIA the option for a joint
system management of canal systems or complete management takeover of relatively small
systems. One salient feature of IMT is the negotiation between the two parties regarding thesharing of the collected ISF and responsibilities for the repair and maintenance of facilities
and structures. Contracting provides opportunity for the IAs to generate funds that are in turnused to finance some projects and activities.
Overall, participatory management has generated optimistic gains in the improvementof NIA and IA operations. But some refinements to the program still have to be instituted inorder to upgrade those initial gains. Among the areas needing more attention are: (a) the issueof delayed payment of IA remuneration in both the O & M contracting and IMT agreements
as these affect the ability of IAs to finance some projects and activities; (b) pulling-out of the
IDO in the service area just one year after the IA had been organized may be pre-mature as
the association still need assistance including additional training and capability building
during its infancy stage; and (c) the issue of redundancy of IMT- displaced NIA staff whichmust be remedied if acceleration of the program is seriously desired.

2

INTRODUCTION
In the Philippines, the agency mandated by the government to harness and develop all
available and possible water resources for irrigation is the NIA. The agency was establishedin 1963 through Republic Act 3601 as a government-owned and controlled corporation. In all
the years since its creation, NIA’s operation was basically characterized by the maxim“doing-things-for-farmers” (Bagadion,1989). It implemented all the necessary planning,
design, construction and operation functions of irrigation systems according to its own paceand discretion. It delivered water to the farmers’ lot on one hand while on the other hand,
farmers utilized the water to irrigate their crops and then paid fixed seasonal ISF in return.
The arrangement, therefore, was more of a “seller-customer” relationship.
For over a decade this had been the scenario until the mid – 70’s when the so-called“Participatory Approach Program” or PAP in irrigation development and management was
introduced (Siy,1989). Later on, PAP was institutionalized as a guiding principle in all NIA’s
irrigation program. As implied, PAP is a concept of participation or involvement of all
stakeholders in the whole process of irrigation development and management - from project
identification to operation and maintenance (O&M).
PAP actually drew inspirations from the results of a study of successful indigenous
irrigation systems in Northern Philippines that showed organized farmers were committed tomaintain their irrigation systems over time because they had earlier contributed labor andmaterials in its construction. The scenario was likewise triggered by the widespread
observation that irrigation facilities during those days could not be properly maintained ascontrol gates were tampered with, illegal water diversions or water stealing was rampant andplanting schedules were not being followed. As an overall effect, available water was notefficiently used resulting to reduced areas served. Also, the lack of a formal organization3

among farmers resulted to more conflicts in water distribution and allocation most especiallyduring months of low supply.
It therefore became apparent that farmer-beneficiaries of irrigation projects have to beorganized into formal groups or associations. Originally called compact farm associations,the name of irrigation water users association evolved into what is known today as Irrigators
Associations or simply identified by the acronym IA. Through their IAs, the farmers are now
able to participate in the planning, construction or rehabilitation as well as in the O&M ofirrigation systems. Moreover, IAs are registered by the Philippine’ Securities and Exchange
Commission as non-stock, non-profit and non-sectarian organization enabling it to attainjuridical personality for negotiating with the government as well as with private institutions
including non-government institutions.
But while the IAs were needed to promote better irrigation service and also to enhance
the collection of ISF, the greater objective of the policy direction was the incorporation of
farmers’ participation in the process of irrigation development and management.

KEYWORDSNIA – National Irrigation Administration
PAP – Participatory Approach Program
IA – Irrigators Associations
O&M – Operation and Maintenance
IMT – Irrigation Management Transfer

IRRIGATION SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT IN THE PHILIPPINES
Irrigation systems in the Philippines are categorized according to how these aredeveloped and managed. There are three (3) types, namely: (a) National Irrigation Systems

4

(NIS), (b) Communal Irrigation Systems (CIS), and (c) Private Irrigation Systems (PIS). NISs
normally have a service area of 1,000 hectares or more, technically owned by the government
but jointly managed with IAs. CIS, on the other hand, are those schemes with less than 1,000
hectares and whose construction was assisted by NIA but after project completion, O&M, isfully handed over to the concerned IAs. With the advent of Republic 7160 signed into law in1991, the development and management of CIS were devolved or transferred from thenational government to the local government units. PIS are schemes owned by private
individuals or corporations, were constructed with or without government assistance andunless the owners seek NIA assistance, the systems are managed independently.

The

presentation of this country paper focuses on the NIS category of irrigation system.
A basic but very important requirement in NIS operation is the formal organization of
farmer-beneficiaries into IAs. At the forefront of this critical work is the Institutional
Development Officer (IDO) who is deployed in the service area by NIA to guide the IA fromits formation stage up to about one year after the association’s formal establishment.
Normally, it takes about 6 to 9 months to organize farmers into an IA after which theassociation is registered. As part of the development process, the IAs undergo various typesof training to equip the officers with the necessary skills, knowledge and attitude inperforming their tasks and responsibilities. The areas of training include basic leadership andmanagement, financial management and irrigation system management. The trained officers
are expected to pass on the learning to their members. To determine their viability as an
association, an annual IA functionality survey is conducted by NIA. The results of the survey
are used by the agency as a basis in planning and implementing assistance programs tostrengthen the IAs. Assistance programs include establishing linkages with other government
offices, private institutions and NGOs.

5

Once determined to be functional or viable, IAs are encouraged by NIA to enter into
contracting arrangement for the O&M of the irrigation system under three (3) options. Under
the so-called Type I contract, an IA takes over an irrigation canal section and performs
maintenance activities like clearing of debris, cutting of grasses and weeds that obstruct theflow of water. This stretch of canal has a length of about 3.5 kilometers if earthen or 7.0
kilometers if lined or made of concrete. For the services rendered, NIA pays the IA about
2,400 Philippine Pesos (US$44) per month upon completion of a satisfactory work by thelatter. Another contract option is Type II wherein NIA transfer to an IA the responsibility of
ISF collection from the farmers.

Under this arrangement, the IA gets an incentive or“commission” ranging from 2 – 15 % of the collected amount for current account for as longas collection efficiency is at least 51%. An additional incentive of 2% of the collected amountis given to the IA for the collection of back accounts. Type III contract arrangement allows an
IA to fully take over the management of small NIS. This contract scheme is very much similar
to that of CIS with some minor modification in the amortization agreement.
In the last 15 years of implementing the NIA-IA O&M contracting, the issue ofdelayed payment by NIA of the IAs’ incentives or commission has to a large extent affected
the performance of the associations. Since the incentives are a major source of IA’s various
projects, late payment somehow has contributed to slowing down of activities.
In the late-90’s, in consonance with its continuing effort to sustain its PAP concept,
NIA had introduced the so-called Irrigation Management Transfer (IMT) program. Under
IMT, a joint system management (JSM) contract is signed by NIA and an IA or an IA
federation. O&M tasks as well as responsibilities in the repair of damaged structures andfacilities are delineated between the NIA and the IAs. One salient feature of the JSM contract
is the sharing agreement of the collected ISF the extent of which is negotiated by both parties.
Usually, in most NISs, the agreed sharing ratio is 50:50 which means that for the collected

6

ISF, NIA and IA each get one- half of the amount. The idea of IMT is to eventually increase
the role of IAs and decrease the role of NIA. When evaluation showed that an IA is alreadycapable of performing additional responsibilities, then a transfer of former NIA functions iseffected and a new ISF sharing deal is negotiated. In the true essence of PAP, the social andtechnical dimensions of irrigation development and management are integrated in IMT toensure program sustainability. IMT is intended to: (a) reduced O & M expenditures of thegovernment; (b) empower users and increase their satisfaction through beneficiary
participation (c) increase water use efficiency by improving local governance; and (d)increase productivity. Considering the varied sizes of NIS, IMT has two models, namely: (1)Complete Transfer in which the management of an irrigation systems with less than 3,000
hectares of service area is totally transferred to the IA or IA Federation; and (2) Joint System
Management, applicable for bigger systems (3,000 hectares and larger), wherein NIA
continues to manage the main system (head works and main canals) while the IA or IA
Federation takes over the management of the lateral head gates including the delivery of waterin the turnouts. For both models, NIA retains ownership of the irrigation facilities and the
responsibility for major repairs.
In the year 2003, the World Bank had conducted a three-phased study to review the
implementation of IMT1. The main objective of the study was to formulate recommendations
for the improvement and sustainability of the existing IAs and future IMT contracts. Amongthe major findings of the study were: (1) participation in management by IAs resulted tostrong feeling of ownership; (2) faster resolution of water-related conflicts; (3) better
maintenance of canals and other facilities; (4) enhanced financial capability from the ISF
share; (5) reduced burden in system operation by NIA; and (6) reduced O & M costs for NIA.
The program, however, had its own share of problems/issues notable of which is personnel

1- The author was part of the Phase II study as Institutional Development Specialist counterpart from NIA.

7

redundancy. Under IMT, the IA takes over the area being managed by a NIA staff who aresupposed to be retired under the program. But while the IA had already assumed the
responsibilities, the displaced NIA personnel remain in active duty and therefore still
receiving compensation. This brings to a situation of staff redundancy and causing a financial
burden to the agency.

CONCLUSION
Participatory management and development had become a cornerstone, a foundationof irrigation program in the Philippines. Through the NIA, the paradigm shift from nonparticipatory to participatory perspective has allowed the involvement of other irrigation
stakeholders – the IAs, government agencies and the private sector including non-governmentorganizations.
Introducing the concept of formally organizing irrigation farmers into IAs and granting
it with recognition as a juridical entity has empowered the association to become independentand self-reliant organization. The IDO’s role is very essential as an IA’s performancesomehow reflects the way it was organized and developed. Their tenure of only one year in
the area after the establishment of the IA may be short-lived as the association needs moreguidance especially during its infancy stage.
Training as an organizing and development strategy is very effective in building thecapacity of the IAs. Training enhances the skills, knowledge and attitude of the farmerbeneficiaries to manage the affairs of their organization, their finances as well as the
management of the O&M of their irrigation system. However, outright relying on the officers
who just recently received training to train their members may be an over-expectation. It willtake time before farmer leaders can become effective trainers themselves.

8

Assistance programs to establish linkages and have access to available beneficial
programs and projects both from the government and private sector further opened the outlookof the IA for growth and development.
O&M contracting and IMT have afforded the IA the opportunity to actively participate
not only in O&M but to bright prospect for financial growth. These programs have instilled in
the IA the sense of ownership thus inspiring them to strive more to improve their conditions.
But just like any program or project, it has its own share of problems but these are
overshadowed by the enormous benefits derived as referred to in the World Bank study.

RECOMMENDATIONS
1.

The concept of participatory management may now have been integrated into NIA’s

irrigation program and the agency may now be “resting on its laurels” so to speak. This should
not be the case.
RECOMMENDATION: NIA should continue to seek other ways to further improve its
approach to programs. Its methods should be dynamic and pro-active so as to keep pace withthe changing time and environment. A continuing staff education and development should bea top priority.
2.

Considering that the role of the IDO is very crucial to IA formation and development,

the one-year guidance period may not be sufficient to make the IA truly strong and cohesive
organization.
RECOMMENDATION: The IDO’s presence should be extended a little more. For a neworganization, the first 2 to 3 years is very critical to its survival and viability. Close guidance
and mentoring of the IA by the IDO is therefore very necessary. The IA Functionality Survey
is a reliable barometer that will indicate the association’s readiness to stand on its own atwhich time the IDO’s presence may only be sparingly required.

9

3.

Relying on IA officers who received training and in turn train their members is anover-expectation. Training people require special skills and knowledge. Their attendance toone or two training sessions or seminar could not turned them to become “instant trainers”
RECOMMENDATION: Initially, the trained farmer-leaders may be tapped as co-trainers or
facilitators with NIA staff as lead trainer(s). It is expected that over time, the farmer-leaders
will become effective trainers themselves.
4. IMT may have led to some significant improvements in irrigation management in general
but much more could be done to improve the program and make it sustainable. Notable issue
that should be resolved, as it is holding up further progress, is NIA staff redundancy.
RECOMMENDATION: An annual evaluation of the IMT program must be conducted tothresh out related institutional, technical and financial constraints that hinder program
implementation. The result can provide vital data and information that will be useful in the
management and decision-making processes both by the IAs and NIA. On the redundancy
issue, NIA should not just rely on natural attrition (compulsory retirement) but accelerate
sourcing out of funds for separation benefits of would-be-displaced staff. Likewise, the IAs
should be encouraged to hire retired NIA staff (but with reduced compensation) to tap theirexpertise and experience in managing their irrigation systems.

REFERENCES


Korten, F., Siy, R., 1989. Transforming a Bureaucracy: The Experience of thePhilippine National Irrigation Administration. Ateneo de Manila Press, Manila. Phil.



A Comprehensive History of Irrigation in the Philippines, 1990, NIA. Philippines

Memorandum Circular No. 41, series of 1991, NIA. Philippines

Irrigation Management Transfer Study, 2004, Hassal and Associates/SDS, Manila.
Philippines.

10